EPYC 7301 vs Opteron 6376
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 7301 outperforms Opteron 6376 by a whopping 169% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1828 | 1049 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.20 | 1.36 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 1.17 | 2.13 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Abu Dhabi (2012) | Naples (2017−2018) |
| Release date | 5 November 2012 (13 years ago) | 29 June 2017 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $750 | $825 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
EPYC 7301 has 580% better value for money than Opteron 6376.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Opteron 6376 and EPYC 7301: number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 22 |
| L1 cache | 768 KB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 16 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (per die) | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 192 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 2,400 million | 4,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Opteron 6376 and EPYC 7301 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 4 | 2 (Multiprocessor) |
| Socket | G34 | TR4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 170 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Opteron 6376 and EPYC 7301. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Opteron 6376 and EPYC 7301 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Opteron 6376 and EPYC 7301. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 Eight-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 2 TiB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 170.671 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Opteron 6376 and EPYC 7301.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.18 | 8.57 |
| Recency | 5 November 2012 | 29 June 2017 |
| Threads | 16 | 32 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 170 Watt |
Opteron 6376 has 48% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7301, on the other hand, has a 169% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 100% more threads, and a 129% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 7301 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Opteron 6376 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
